redistricting

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:34 am

They won't. They're the Minneapolis team which is D1.

I did hear that D1 will invite nearby associations to play a series of games with D1 as they have done with D3 and D2. It will allow shrinking urban associations to pick up games against opponents more closely aligned with their associations size and skill. It may also lead to neighboring associations having interest in joining D1 as it may suit them better in terms of skill and travel. It's been a nice way for small Districts 1, 2 and 3 to pick up their game counts without the difficulty of scheduling scrimmage games.

packerpuck19 · Post by **packerpuck19** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:49 pm

I definitely would like to see the closely nit twin cities teams to be put in the same district. Instead of having all of D8 travel 2 1/2 hours a couple times a year, they could drop those southern teams from the district and add some of the Johnson, Como, Richfeild, St. Thomas, Roseville, Tartan, and so on. I just dont like the mess that those southern teams make for everyone in D8. Not only is it the drive which I mentioned, but its the scheduling challenge. You have to schedule them on a weekend day. So after you do that with the 4 or 5 teams that you have to play, then that takes an entire weekend that you could have scheduled a tournment, in turn limiting your tournment options. Also, the southern teams get a much easier schedule than everyone else because they get there schedules put together in a way that the southern teams will play each other twice due to travel time, and generally the southern teams are considerably weaker, so in turn you get a team like a Rochester who just mops up with playing 10 of there 16 games against weak opponents, and ending up with a higher seed for playoffs, not because they are a better team but because they live far away. There are all kinds of teams that are in southern MN why not join up with them? I understand that they like the competition up in the cities, but whos to say that Onalaska Wisconsin is a more deserving association of that than lets say a New Ulm, or Owatonna. I just dont understand why some of these teams are in our District.

Onalaska- Not even in MN, 2:30 min. away (double whammy)
Lacrescent- Pushing 3 hours away
Winona- 2:30 min. away
River Falls- Not in MN
Rochester(maybe even 2 Teams)- at least 2 hours away
Hudson- Not in MN
Dodge County- Ok maybe...but really? Where did these guys come from?
Northfeild- Somewhat understandable, its a horse a piece for them
Red Wing- Kind of the same deal as Northfeild

What a weird district huh????

Unless somebody else can shed some light on this Im going to go ahead and say that there is no other situation even similar to this in the Twin Cities.

iwearmysunglassesatnight · Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:21 pm

welcome to the new mythical "dakota district"

1. eagan
2. rosemount
3. burnsville
4. apple valley
5. eastview
6. lakeville south
7. farmington
8. lakeville north
9. northfield
10. igh/s st paul
11. prior lake
12. shakopee

new district 6
1. jefferson
2. kennedy
3. edina
4. ep
5. tonka
6. chaska
7. to be chanhassen
8. waconia
9. hopkins
10. wayzata

Gopherhockey3 · Post by **Gopherhockey3** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:22 am

puckboy wrote:please post your ideas for redistricting. Make sure you add what area you are from and rough size of how many kids tryout at each of the traveling age groups in your association. Hopefully we will come up with some ideas that could be used ny Minnesota Hockey.

I think that Mound westonka should be put in district 6 instead of Orono. Mound wins their district by a longshot every year and Orono gets housed every game they play. Mound has scrimmaged Orono twice and killed them. district 5 is terrible i think it would be wise to put mound westonka in a better district.

TriedThat2 · Post by **TriedThat2** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:51 am

GH3,
I don't think Mound wins by longshot every year:
2007 Final Standings
BA 3rd
BB 4th
PWA 1st
PWB 2nd and 6th
PWC last
12U 6th

Looks to me like they fit fine in the terrible district 5 league

Whatthe · Post by **Whatthe** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:19 pm

Any word on when re-districting might occur?

I believe that in order to redistrict you need approval from the Minnesota Hockey board, which includes all the district directors. Some of these directors would have their positions eliminated, and/or would be combined into districts with other existing directors, by redistricting.

Take a look at how long this thread has been active. This subject is a dead horse.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 3:03 pm

Whatthe wrote:
Any word on when re-districting might occur?
I believe that in order to redistrict you need approval from the Minnesota Hockey board, which includes all the district directors. Some of these directors would have their positions eliminated, and/or would be combined into districts with other existing directors, by redistricting.

Take a look at how long this thread has been active. This subject is a dead horse.

Actually, from what I understand (and have heard from our District Director) is that this is NOT "beating a dead horse" as you say, but that re-districting is very much a possibility to happen in the near future. My question was simply one asking if anyone associated with Minnesota Hockey might know where we are at with it. Elliot mentioned something about a task force put together by the Minnesota Hockey board to look into this.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:43 pm

The district directors began working on a plan at the last meeting.
We will continue at the April meeting with the expectation that our plan will go into effect in 2010 - 2011 season. (not enugh time for the 09-10 season)

play4fun · Post by **play4fun** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:26 am

Elliot,

Any chance that the work on re-districting will include consideration of re-classification (e.g., AA vs. A)?

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:22 pm

play4fun wrote:Elliot,

Any chance that the work on re-districting will include consideration of re-classification (e.g., AA vs. A)?

It was talked about briefly, but that is possible.

Other than adding 2 new districts the rest is a blank sheet of paper.

Whatthe · Post by **Whatthe** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:32 pm

Actually, from what I understand (and have heard from our District Director) is that this is NOT "beating a dead horse" as you say, but that re-districting is very much a possibility to happen in the near future.

We will continue at the April meeting with the expectation that our plan will go into effect in 2010 - 2011 season.

Whoops, there goes another one-and-a-half years. Just when I was trying to get my horse Trigger back on her feet.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:23 pm

Whatthe wrote:
Actually, from what I understand (and have heard from our District Director) is that this is NOT "beating a dead horse" as you say, but that re-districting is very much a possibility to happen in the near future.

We will continue at the April meeting with the expectation that our plan will go into effect in 2010 - 2011 season.
Whoops, there goes another one-and-a-half years. Just when I was trying to get my horse Trigger back on her feet.

I'm not sure, but that seems like a poor attempt at sarcasm.

IMO, implementing a new plan a year and a half down the road IS the near future. I wouldn't expect something to be ready to be implemented by the coming season. But based on what Elliot just said, if re-districting DID have a chance to be implemented by 2010, that obviously means we would see the details of said plan prior to that....possibly during next season.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:48 pm

muckandgrind wrote:
Whatthe wrote:
Actually, from what I understand (and have heard from our District Director) is that this is NOT "beating a dead horse" as you say, but that re-districting is very much a possibility to happen in the near future.

We will continue at the April meeting with the expectation that our plan will go into effect in 2010 - 2011 season.
Whoops, there goes another one-and-a-half years. Just when I was trying to get my horse Trigger back on her feet.
I'm not sure, but that seems like a poor attempt at sarcasm.

IMO, implementing a new plan a year and a half down the road IS the near future. I wouldn't expect something to be ready to be implemented by the coming season. But based on what Elliot just said, if re-districting DID have a chance to be implemented by 2010, that obviously means we would see the details of said plan prior to that....possibly during next season.

Hopefully this Fall.

Whatthe · Post by **Whatthe** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:06 pm

I'm not sure, but that seems like a poor attempt at sarcasm.

IMO, implementing a new plan a year and a half down the road IS the near future. I wouldn't expect something to be ready to be implemented by the coming season. But based on what Elliot just said, if re-districting DID have a chance to be implemented by 2010, that obviously means we would see the details of said plan prior to that....possibly during next season.

You can't read this thread from front to back (including Elliott's comments over the years) and believe that Minnesota Hockey is making progress on redistricting. The redistricting discussion was active long before the 2005-2006 season when this thread was created. This thread was even linked to the Minnesota Hockey website for a time. Since that time there have been committees, a survey to all MH members, an association that tried to move districts but was told to hold off pending redistricting, meetings, etc.

To my knowledge, MH has not floated a single redistricting proposal to the members.

Come next fall, we will hear about a group of DD's that are working on a solution and hope to have something to present to the full MH board so we can redistrict before the 2011-2012 season. Then the cycle repeats every 12 months.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:38 pm

Whatthe wrote:
I'm not sure, but that seems like a poor attempt at sarcasm.

IMO, implementing a new plan a year and a half down the road IS the near future. I wouldn't expect something to be ready to be implemented by the coming season. But based on what Elliot just said, if re-districting DID have a chance to be implemented by 2010, that obviously means we would see the details of said plan prior to that....possibly during next season.
You can't read this thread from front to back (including Elliott's comments over the years) and believe that Minnesota Hockey is making progress on redistricting. The redistricting discussion was active long before the 2005-2006 season when this thread was created. This thread was even linked to the Minnesota Hockey website for a time. Since that time there have been committees, a survey to all MH members, an association that tried to move districts but was told to hold off pending redistricting, meetings, etc.

To my knowledge, MH has not floated a single redistricting proposal to the members.

Come next fall, we will hear about a group of DD's that are working on a solution and hope to have something to present to the full MH board so we can redistrict before the 2011-2012 season. Then the cycle repeats every 12 months.

I understand what you are saying and agree.
I just hope we don't stall this time.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:39 am

I was on the New Prague board from 2000-2002. We were going to petition to get out of District 4 back then, and were told to just be patient, because MAHA (as it was known then) was going to be redistricting in the near future.

nine years later, we're still waiting.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:48 pm

hockeydad wrote:I was on the New Prague board from 2000-2002. We were going to petition to get out of District 4 back then, and were told to just be patient, because MAHA (as it was known then) was going to be redistricting in the near future.

nine years later, we're still waiting.

You didn't hear it correctly.

It was, 'MAHA may be redistricting in the future.'

Throwback · Post by **Throwback** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:32 pm

puckboy wrote:breaking up the larger associations would also solve many of the metro problems. How about mandating if you have over say 80-90 kids at a certain level you need to field 2 A teams.

I agree, and not an A1 and an A2, but evenly divided teams. This would provide the kids that are A skilled players anywhere else in the state the opportunity to play A level competition instead of just beating up on the B's.

surehockey · Post by **surehockey** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 4:15 pm

what are some of the proposed moves? Districts?

Whatthe · Post by **Whatthe** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:36 pm

from another thread:

To that end the DD in two meetings and some emails have a proposal for redistricting. Districts 11, 12 & 16 would have little or no change. 2 new districts would be added and balance would be achieved amongst the remaining and 2 new districts in terms of travel and strength.

The DD's are also now looking at redoing the region methodology and state tourney alignment.

Elliott: Please lay out the proposed redistricting.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:05 am

Whatthe wrote:from another thread:

To that end the DD in two meetings and some emails have a proposal for redistricting. Districts 11, 12 & 16 would have little or no change. 2 new districts would be added and balance would be achieved amongst the remaining and 2 new districts in terms of travel and strength.

The DD's are also now looking at redoing the region methodology and state tourney alignment.

Elliott: Please lay out the proposed redistricting.

I have to bring my notes and spreadsheets in from home...
I can't do it off the op of my head...

but the idea is to add 2 new districts in the spring of 2010 and start playing that Fall.

Dont quote me (contact your DD for more specifics)
Distrcit 9 would look something like D8 & D4...
Rochester, Winona, Red Wing, Dodge county, Northfield, Albert Lea, Austin, New Prague, Owatona, Faribault....
District 14 would look like St Cloud, Sauk Rapids, Sartell, Little Falls, ....

Metro districts would be similar with a few changes....

This will come out for broadcast to everyone after the MH June meeting.
The north distrcits may have some shifting but the north DD have not really had a chance to meet on it and to be practical there cannot be any major shifts without a merger of districts or something on tha level and that has nto been proposed.

Night Train · Post by **Night Train** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:41 am

Hopefully they'll strengthen District 1, and balance the size of some of the other large metro Districts, by moving Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Sibley, North St. Paul and Spring Lake Park into District 1.

Other ideas for Associations moving into D1?

phil mccracken · Post by **phil mccracken** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:58 pm

Night Train wrote:Hopefully they'll strengthen District 1, and balance the size of some of the other large metro Districts, by moving Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Sibley, North St. Paul and Spring Lake Park into District 1.

Other ideas for Associations moving into D1?

lakeville hockey association will have better competition and travel less this winter.

hockeydad · Post by **hockeydad** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:46 pm

phil mccracken wrote:
Night Train wrote:Hopefully they'll strengthen District 1, and balance the size of some of the other large metro Districts, by moving Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Sibley, North St. Paul and Spring Lake Park into District 1.

Other ideas for Associations moving into D1?

lakeville hockey association will have better competition and travel less this winter.

Not this winter....it says starting in the spring of 2010....

Whatthe · Post by **Whatthe** » Tue May 05, 2009 10:49 am

Why will Lakeville have better competition? Is there going to be a metro-only district 8 group?

I didn't understand Elliott's post about District 8 and 4 looking like District 9.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

redistricting

Re: redistricting

Re: If you have ideas (opinions)